The petitioner sought quashing of a domicile condition for women reservation and appointment. The Single Judge disposed of the petition on the same terms as a pending appealing judgment (LPA No.160 of 2023) in the context of Women's Reservation Rules.
The petition was disposed of in the same terms as the judgment in LPA No.160 of 2023.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
203
CWP-8346-2022 Date of decision: 11.09.2026
Nisha Kamboj
.....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR
Present : Ms. Alka Chatrath, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Siddharth Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Tanya Bhurji, Advocate for respondent N.3.
NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)
VINAY 2026.09.11 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
-2-
CWP-8346-2022
being eligible and meritorious and further eligible for appointment against one of the five posts earmarked for women in general category. 2. On the last date of hearing, i.e., 23.07.2026, the following
order was passed:-
“Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present case is squarely covered by the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No.16556 of 2022 titled as ‘Kalpana Komal Bhati Vs. State of Punjab and others’ and other connected cases decided on 12.01.2023, however, the said judgment has been impugned by the petitioners of the said petition in LPA No.160 of 2023 titled as ‘Kalpana Komal Bhati Vs. State of Punjab and others’ which is pending before the Division Bench of this Court for hearing on 17.08.2026.
Adjourned to 11.09.2026 to await the decision of abovesaid LPA.”
order dated 17.08.2026, passed in LPA No.160 of 2023 titled as
'Kalpana Komal Bhati v. State of Punjab and others' and connected
cases, which has been disposed of in the following terms:-
“1. By this common orders, two appeals, the details of which have been given in the heading, are being disposed of as both the appeals involve the same question of law on similar facts. The facts are being taken from LPA No.160 of 2023 for the sake of convenience.
2. In the present appeal, challenge is to the order dated 12.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No.16556 of 2022 titled as Kalpana Komal Bhati vs. State of Punjab and others .
3. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants intend to approach the respondents by filing a representation that the Amendment to the Punjab Civil Service (Reservation for Women) Rules, 2020 (for short ‘2020 Rules’) needs to be effected so that there is no ambiguity and the entitled women can get the benefit of Women Reservation without there being any litigation on the said aspect, and the respondents be directed to decide the issue in a timebound manner so that no further grievance arises qua any other selection to be made in a case where there arises a question of reservation to be granted to Women.
VINAY 2026.09.11 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
CWP-8346-2022
-3-
3. Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that in case, any such representation is received at the hands of the appellants, the same will be decided by the competent authority in accordance with the law within a period of eight weeks from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order by passing an appropriate speaking order.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State further submits that in case, it is found feasible to grant relief to the appellants, the same will be done, otherwise due reasons will be mentioned for not accepting the claim of the appellants in the speaking order to be passed and the said order will be duly conveyed to the appellants.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that keeping in view the statement of learned State counsel, the present appeals may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further with liberty as prayed for.
7. Ordered accordingly.
8. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case.
9. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.” 4. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present
petition may also be disposed of in the same terms as LPA No.160 of
2023 .
| 11.09.2026 Vinay |
(NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE |
|
|---|---|---|
| Whether speaking/reasoned | : Yes/No |
|
| Whether reportable | : Yes/No |
VINAY 2026.09.11 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to allow the petition for quashing the domicile condition requirement for general category women candidates to avail 33% reservation in Punjab posts.
Whether to direct the respondent to issue an appointment letter to the petitioner.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kalpana Komal Bhati vs. State of Punjab and othersReferred¶20
CWP No.16556 of 2022 titled as 'Kalpana Komal Bhati Vs. State of Punjab and others'
Kalpana Komal Bhati vs. State of Punjab and othersFollowed¶25
LPA No.160 of 2023 titled as 'Kalpana Komal Bhati Vs. State of Punjab and others'
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Nisha Kamboj
State of Punjab
Nimit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
